Isildur:Oh, FFS. Zinc cadmium sulfide IS the florescent substance.And this isn't newly revealed. This was extensively reviewed back in 1997. She seems to have added nothing new except vague insinuations about some sort of connection to U.S. Radium.

The Army was not looking to test the effects on residents, they were looking to test dispersion rates and characteristics. They used ZnCdS and in some cases even some actual (but not considered harmful) species of microbes as tracers to estimate what the dispersion of attacks on the cities would be, if an actual bioweapon was used by the Soviets.

Were the tests unethical? Absolutely. By testing in inhabited areas, people were exposed without knowledge or consent to substances that, although thought safe, were not thoroughly enough proven to be so.Were people being deliberately experimented upon in this case? No.

/For that, you can check out the Tuskegee syphilis experiment//As for U.S. Radium, they were forced to stop making Undark (and stopped processing ore for radium) already by the late '20s. Undark's inventor himself died of exposure to the radium.

There are no radioactive particles in zinc cadmium sulfide. It glows because it's fluorescent. It was a test on where radioactive and biochemical particles would spread, but you don't need radioactivity to test wind patterns.

Oh, FFS. Zinc cadmium sulfide IS the florescent substance.And this isn't newly revealed. This was extensively reviewed back in 1997. She seems to have added nothing new except vague insinuations about some sort of connection to U.S. Radium.

The Army was not looking to test the effects on residents, they were looking to test dispersion rates and characteristics. They used ZnCdS and in some cases even some actual (but not considered harmful) species of microbes as tracers to estimate what the dispersion of attacks on the cities would be, if an actual bioweapon was used by the Soviets.

Were the tests unethical? Absolutely. By testing in inhabited areas, people were exposed without knowledge or consent to substances that, although thought safe, were not thoroughly enough proven to be so.Were people being deliberately experimented upon in this case? No.

/For that, you can check out the Tuskegee syphilis experiment//As for U.S. Radium, they were forced to stop making Undark (and stopped processing ore for radium) already by the late '20s. Undark's inventor himself died of exposure to the radium.

Proximuscentauri:You are all SUPPOSED TO CARE about things like this. Radioactive particles or not, tests were done on citizens without their knowledge or consent.Think it doesn't happen anymore? You are a farking idiot.

Do NOT go back to sleep.DO SOMETHING.Too much of a pussy? At least SPREAD AWARENESS.

The important thing is to not lie about what the government does. Was this unethical and immoral? Certainly. Was it dangerous, did it use radioactive particles, was it a test on American citizens? All no.

The more one lies about bad things, the most people will disbelieve new claims of bad things.

You are all SUPPOSED TO CARE about things like this. Radioactive particles or not, tests were done on citizens without their knowledge or consent.Think it doesn't happen anymore? You are a farking idiot.

Do NOT go back to sleep.DO SOMETHING.Too much of a pussy? At least SPREAD AWARENESS.

Maybe an odorless, tasteless chemical causes obesity, diabetes, and slowly reduces intelligence that is being introduced into the food supply to allow the Mushroom People to process humanity into cans of cream soup that go unused in the back of their pantries for decades.